bigstickbonzo Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 I couldn't answer that one. I don't know any of those names because O'Reilly's voice causes molten puss to drip from my ears after about 3 minutes of his bullshit. It's nice to see my old pal, Dennis Miller, on there from time to time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alucard Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 At that point in time, January by the by, did anyone really predict a meltdown of this proportions. Come on, be reasonable. How in the hell was he supposed to forsee the complete bankruptcy of F&F within a year? I know it's his job, and again I believe he should be help accountable to an extent, but seriously now, surely one man didn't ruin the whole damn economy It's wayyy more complex than just Barney Frank is it not? saying otherwise is simply absurd and irrational Ralph Nader knew this exact thing was coming 8 years ago. No one listens to him, he's not a frontrunner. Nader Releases 10-Point Plan to Recover from Financial Crisis Tuesday, September 16, 2008 at 12:00:00 AM RALPH NADER PREDICTED WALL STREET MELTDOWN 8 YEARS AGO Eight years ago, consumer advocate Ralph Nader correctly predicted that the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) were on track to follow the savings and loan industry of the 1980s and 90s into a big financial heap of trouble. Nobody listened, and taxpayers are now at risk of losing tens of billions of dollars. Wall Street is being shaken to its foundation. American International Group Inc., the biggest U.S. insurer by assets, is now teetering on the brink of ruin after suffering losses of $18 billion in the past three quarters, largely due to its sub prime mortgage exposure. "Nader Rips Mae and Mac," declared the Milwaukee Sentinel Journal on June 16, 2000. "Ralph Nader, warning of a potential taxpayer bailout similar to the savings and loan crisis, urged lawmakers to cut government benefits to mortgage-market giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which he called 'poster children for corporate welfare.'" This year Nader, who is also running for president as an independent, is getting credit for his prescience. http://www.votenader.org/media/2008/09/16/meltdown/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigstickbonzo Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 By Barney telling everything is okay, they did not ask for change, and without change, Freddie and Fannie went into the shits. Uh, If I remember correctly... Bush said atleast 600 times throughout the entire first half of 2008 there was nothing to fear about the housing market. He was denying "recession" when 2/3 of America were screaming bullshit. Even if the housing market and the stock market aren't the Presidents' strong points, he has to know what the fuck is going within his own country. The entire government failed the American people. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanna be drummer Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 Amen brother Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pb Derigable Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 Uh, If I remember correctly... Bush said atleast 600 times throughout the entire first half of 2008 there was nothing to fear about the housing market. He was denying "recession" when 2/3 of America were screaming bullshit. Even if the housing market and the stock market aren't the Presidents' strong points, he has to know what the fuck is going within his own country. The entire government failed the American people. Period. But there lies the truth somewhere. The dems have been screaming about the economy for the last two years. And they blamed it all on Bush Policy. Which the only thing i can think of that could be was the tax cuts and the "weak dollar". None of was at fault, because those where the only thing that had kept the economy floating for the last 8 years. So if you're stating the Bush policy of not getting rid of all the bad Dem ideas from the Clinton years. Than yes, you are correct, Bush failed to get rid of the bad dem polices at hand. I as a conservative, blame Bush on that. But I did not vote for Bush because he can clean up Washington (that was McCain thing back in 2000) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigstickbonzo Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 But there lies the truth somewhere. The dems have been screaming about the economy for the last two years. And they blamed it all on Bush Policy. Which the only thing i can think of that could be was the tax cuts and the "weak dollar". None of was at fault, because those where the only thing that had kept the economy floating for the last 8 years. So if you're stating the Bush policy of not getting rid of all the bad Dem ideas from the Clinton years. Than yes, you are correct, Bush failed to get rid of the bad dem polices at hand. I as a conservative, blame Bush on that. But I did not vote for Bush because he can clean up Washington (that was McCain thing back in 2000) The Democrats are to blame for not doing a damn thing since getting in, but the main reason why our economy has failed, wall street has failed and the housing market has failed is because we were out sourcing so much money that we had on credit, not paper, the end result was we put too much weight on the international system and in return, borrowed so much money, it tanked the system. Now, the way CEOs were managing their companies and raking in money was faulty before Bush got into office. Congress failed to act in the late 90s when their were warning signs of what could happen if money was poorly managed. The housing market crisis and the bank failures are only part of the puzzle. The big blunder is still the billions wasted on Iraq- which has more than anything lead to this current situation. And that you can blame both Democrats and Republicans for. History shall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigstickbonzo Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 George Bush has been in office for 7 1/2 years. The first six the economy was fine. That's because, the 1 thing you can give Bush credit for, is he won the psychological war with the American public. While we wasted billions of dollars overseas, America slept, I mean spent like they were told. Sure the economy was running fine, it wasn't making any headway though. Just getting by, until the cracks had too much water leaking out and the damn began to burst. Again, the Democrats haven't done jack since taking over Congress. But to claim the country was in a nirvana-state-of-mind for the first 6 years of the Bush Administration is down right pathetic. Because, we were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L 7 Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 What good does placing blame do? Isn`t that like arm chair quarterbacking? Hind sight is always 20/20. Prosperity is cyclic. Good times followed by bad times. If Joseph had been around to interpret the Pharoah Bush`s dreams, then he would have forseen 7 years of plenty followed by 7 years of lean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake of Shadows Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 George Bush has been in office for 7 1/2 years. The first six the economy was fine. A little over one year ago: 1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high 2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon 3) The unemployment rate was 4.5% 4) The DOW JONES hit a record high--14,000 + 5) American's were buying new cars, taking cruises, vacations overseas, living large! But American's wanted 'CHANGE'! So, in 2006 they voted in a Democratic Congress and yes--we got 'CHANGE' all right. In the PAST YEAR: 1) Consumer confidence has plummeted 2) Gasoline is now over $4 a gallon and climbing! 3) Unemployment is up to 5.5% (a 10% increase) 4) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $12 TRILLION DOLLARS and prices are still dropping 5) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure 6) as I write, THE DOW is probing another low $2.5 TRILLION DOLLARS HAS EVAPORATED FROM THEIR STOCKS, BONDS & MUTUAL FUNDS INVESTMENT PORTFOLIOS! YES, IN 2006 AMERICA VOTED FOR CHANGE...AND WE SURE GOT IT! REMEMBER THE PRESIDENT HAS NO CONTROL OVER ANY OF THESE ISSUES, ONLY CONGRESS DOES. AND WHAT HAS CONGRESS DONE IN THE LAST TWO YEARS? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! NOW THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT CLAIMS HE IS GOING TO REALLY GIVE US CHANGE, AND HE HAS THE BACKING OF A DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS! JUST HOW MUCH MORE 'CHANGE' DO YOU THINK YOU CAN STAND? Where's the 'my name is McCain and I approved this message' part? Aren't all political ads required by law to put in that disclaimer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
59LesPaul Posted October 7, 2008 Share Posted October 7, 2008 JUST HOW MUCH MORE 'CHANGE' DO YOU THINK YOU CAN STAND? As much as it takes to fill my fucking pockets,cupboards and gas tank back up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.